Health Care crosses the finish line

He finally did it. Mr Obama has achieved his career ambition of passing the first installment of the U.S. Government takeover of the entire American economy. In an effort that began with the nationalization of General Motors and Chrysler and the bailouts of financial institutions that should have been allowed to fail, Mr. Obama can now claim to have his hands on another huge sector of the world's dominant economy: the one sixth of the economy that comprises the health care industry.

While democrats guzzle champagne and munch brie in celebration of their victory “for American families,” we now have to brace ourselves for the imposition of this massive extra-constitutional usurpation of power by the federal government. Thousands of new IRS agents will be hired to enforce the new “Health Care” legislation. They will be thousands of additional agents who will have more authority to intrude into our lives than ever before. Would any of those new agents be democrats? And would any of those new agents have a political impetus to the performance of their duties?

We can be sure that would never happen. No presidential administration would ever take advantage of government power to advance a political agenda, would it? Except maybe the Roosevelt Administration when it tried to pack the Supreme Court in the 1930’s. Oh, and also the Nixon Administration’s extra-legal activities during Watergate era? An enemies list? Does Rush Limbaugh or Glenn Beck have anything to fear from those new IRS agents? Hardly, the chances of a president abusing his authority for political purposes are too insignificant to consider. Or are they?That sort of thing just doesn’t happen here, does it?

But even if they do not abuse their new-found power, and manage their new duties with fairness and justice paramount in their thinking, what is the probability that the administration of health care in this country will improve as a result of Mr Obama’s victory? Perhaps we could look at the performance of some other federal programs and shed some light on that probability.

What about that old Department of Energy? A quick peek at the DoE reveals an agency that was established by the failing Carter Administration in 1977 to end U.S. dependence on foreign petroleum products following the mid-east oil embargo of earlier in that decade. At its inception, in August 1977, US oil imports totaled 2.4billion barrels per year. Now, 33 years later, the Department of Energy will spend $29 billion this year while not producing a single drop of oil. And for that $29 billion, the nation will still import 3.5 billion barrels of oil, an increase of 45% over the 1977 figure. Hmmm, that’s not working so well.

Well, maybe the War on Poverty is doing better. The program, begun by President Johnson in 1964, had resulted in a poverty rate of 11.1% after its first ten years. Now, 45 years later and after continuing to transfer trillions of US dollars from producers to the indigent, the poverty rate has fallen to 12.6%. Wait a second! We have spent trillions of dollars in the War on Poverty and have more of it now than we did in 1964. We’re losing the War on Poverty. Any good democrat should be calling for the government to cut and run from this war, like they do for all other wars.

Then there is the Postal Service and AMTRAK and Fannie Mae and Ginnie Mac, all of which continue to consume taxpayer money at enormous rates while providing marginal service to the American people.

Even a democrat should be able to look at history and determine that government solutions to social problems do not ever solve the problems they are intended to address. They do, however, inspire the mindless support of millions of beneficiaries of government largess, which is the real motive for Obama Care. The reality is that we have just bought a huge new federal Health Care beaurocracy that, like the energy produced by the Department of Energy, will produce zero health care but will cost trillions of dollars that we do not have.

The trouble is they are quickly killing the golden goose. As Lady Margaret Thatcher once brilliantly uttered, “The trouble with socialism is that pretty soon you run out of other people’s money.”

Campaigners unable to govern

It was hard to find fault with the political instincts of the Obama Campaign during its successful run for the Presidency in 2008. But it seems that actually governing is a bit more difficult than campaigning. Mr. Obama, and those around him in the White House have bungled their first year in office in a manner that may prevent them from ever being effective while they occupy the highest office in the land.

In their headlong lurch to hobble the nation with government health care, the president and his advisors have completely disregarded the one issue of the American people actually want action on, the economy. Instead they have embarked on a single-minded (some might say simple-minded) attempt to force Obama Care through Congress despite the overwhelming opposition of the American people.

Now, one year into the Obama Administration, the economy is terrible, the housing market has crashed, unemployment has reached 10% and the people are becoming enraged at the arrogance of Mr. Obama and his crew. The democrat party is in disarray with many members resigning rather than running for re-election, with those who remain in fear for their electoral chances because of the reckless pursuit of the dream of a (democrat) government takeover of the health care system.

We should be grateful for the incredible ineptitude demonstrated by Mr Obama and his administration in the past year. With a little patience and planning they could have simply run their signature piece of legislation through congress and become law.

The Obama Administration could have started slowly, modestly affecting the change they had promised during the campaign instead of breathlessly leaping off the cliff in an all-or-nothing bid to fundamentally change the American government. They could have acknowledged the crashing economy as the preeminent issue before the American people and taken steps to resurrect it.

What if the Obama crew looked to history and discovered that Presidents Kennedy, Reagan, and George W. Bush had had rousing success in reviving slumping economies through tax cuts. What if the Obama crew had agreed to extend the Bush tax cuts, reduce capital gains taxes to a piddling 10%, and to reduce the corporate income tax to a more reasonable 20% when they first arrived in the White House?

President Obama would have been free to travel the world, bowing and apologizing to any and all the world’s dictators; he could go on taxpayer sponsored dates with his wife to catch a Broadway show; he could go golfing in Hawaii while the incredible American economic engine began to roar once again. He could have sat on the sidelines as businesses felt free to expand, investors flocked back into the market, and the American people went happily back to work.

Then, after a year or so of economic progress and falling unemployment, Mr Obama and his crew would be rightly enjoying the political good will of people happy with their condition and largely indifferent to the usual malfeasance taking place in Washington. In such a condition, Mr Obama could have then introduced his hideous attempt to grab control of the health care system, and with it control of every aspect of our lives. He would have the good will of the people, the willing support of huge majorities in both the House and Senate, and of course the slavish support of the sock puppets in the derelict media. As a result, we would have been looking the other way, as most American were during the Clinton Administration, and would have been saddled with a European-styled Socialist economy for ever.

Then, with his health care takeover safely put to bed, and the American people still hard at work reviving the economy, Mr Obama would have been free to continue his plan to fundamentally change America. Instead, with the economy still in the tank the American people are paying rapt attention to every syllable uttered from Washington. Our attention is focused like a laser on every attempt to substitute government welfare for a little bit more of our freedom.

Mr Obama may yet succeed in ramming this terrible legislation through Congress. But instead of a racing across the finish line like a champion marathon runner breaking the tape with arms outstretched, Mr Obama is more like Jed Clampett coaxing his old jalopy up hill, lurching, sputtering, backfiring, and belching smoke. He may yet make it, but the results will not be pretty.

More importantly, the Obama Administration faces the certainty of landslide electoral defeats in the November congressional election. He will no longer enjoy the overwhelming majorities he now has (and with which he has accomplished nothing). He will have made himself a lame duck in his first year in office.
The Obama Administration is illustrating the difference between campaigning and actually governing.